About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
angeles. >>> headquarters in atlanta this is "early start weekend." some are calling it the next roe v. wade. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >> all of those who argued for nonintervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >>> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons and some lawmakers are saying it is too late to stop mass destruction. >>> what is going on with netflix? another major blunder by the ceo. why he is being investigated by the ccc. >>> it is saturday, december 8th. good morning, everyone. i'm randi kaye. victor blackwell is off today. we start with a landmark decision by the supreme court. the justices decided to hear two ca cases. joe johns has a look. >> randi, after weeks of speculation the court decided to take up two cases on same-sex marriage. the first one about the defensive marriage act. windsor against the united states. they were married in toronto, canada, in 2007. spi
or disagrees with the notion of gay marriage. in 1992 in roe v. wade he wrote our obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code. he's personally opposed to abortion, but voteded in the opposite. there's also in 1996, kennedy was ruling -- voter measure that repealed gay rights ordnances. he wrote the measure was born of on nosty towards gays. the constitution prohibits laws signalling out citizens for general hardships. those are pretty strong words that sound as though he's in the bag. >> i would never consider any justice in the bag, but i think justice kennedy has some very powerful liberty rulings to be proud of and this will be should he rule the right way, consistent with his jurisprudence of liberty. i think all these judges have to ask themselves knowing where the country's going, where the people are, do i want to be the last gasp of prejudice or stand on the right side of history. >> as a final question, now that the court will likely make the decision, if it's not the decision that you are seeking, would you be regretful that the movement decided
for abortion and roe v. wade and said, no, this is not in the hands of the people. we're going to say there's gay marriage, that would do a thrott fire up the republican base and could turn this issue on its head and become a big winner for republicans because they'd feel disenfranchised. >> what about the flip side? what if the republican goes that way, their base doesn't get fired up. democrats have relied on saying to some voters, that other party is not with you. if the republican got with them, does that take this off the table for democrats? >> well, i actually think it takes it off the table and that's good news for americans in general. i mean, i think this issue is a little bit broader than politics. and i know that's weird to say here in washington, but what i think the problem with the stance that the republican party has taken right now is that it's on the wrong side of history. and we have seen throughout history that when there's a group of people that want to deny another group of people less rights and less privileges that other americans enjoy, you know, whether that's bein
by next summer that is groundbreaking for gay marriage rights as roe v. wade was for abortion in the 1970s, potentially at least after they agreed hear arguments on the defense of marriage act and proposition 8. justice correspondent pete williams joins me. pete, the fact that they took both of these cases, what is the significance from your analysis? >> well, it's the prop 8 case, andrea, that could be the biggy. it could be very narrow. the doma case has a very straight forward question. is it constitutional for a federal law to say that the government will not recognize marriages even when they're legal in the states, so that if married couples get married in the nine states where it's now legal, the federal government doesn't recognize those marriages. there's a question about whether that's unconstitutional discrimination, but if the supreme court does strike down doma, it doesn't say anything about whether the states must permit same-sex marriage, it only says if they do, the federal government must recognize them. so it's the proposition 8 case from california that potentially raise
. >>> some are calling it the next "roe v. wade" or brown versus board of education. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >>> all of those who argued for non-intervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons. now some lawmakers are saying it may be too late to stop mass destruction. >>> and could this be the end of "gangnam style" mania? why pop sensation psy is apologizing for some anti-american lyrics. [ telephones ringing ] at chevy's year-end event, we have 11 vehicles that offer an epa-estimated 30 mpg highway or better. yeah? hey. hey. where's your suit? oh, it's casual friday. oh. [ male announcer ] chevy's giving more. this holiday season, get a 2013 malibu ls for around $199 per month, or get $1,000 holiday bonus cash. it's hard to see opportunity in today's challenging environment. unless you have the right perspective. bny mellon wealth manageme
headquarters in atlanta, this is "cnn saturday morning." some are calling it the next roe v. wade or brown v. board of education. the issue the u.s. supreme court agreed to take on that will make history. >> all of those who argued for nonintervention because of the things that might happen have now happened because we failed to intervene. >>> when is enough enough? that is the question many are asking about syria, as the death toll climbs and concerns mount over chemical weapons. now some lawmakers are saying it may be too late to stop mass destruction. >>> and a toddler taken from the only parents she ever knew because of a little known federal law. now they're fighting to get her back, and may be on their way to the supreme court. i'll talk with them live. >>> good morning, everyone. i'm randi kaye. it is 10:00 on the east coast, 7:00 on the west. thanks so much for starting your day with us. it was supposed to be just for laughs. humor. the listeners with a lighthearted prank. two radio deejays called the london hospital where the duchess of cambridge was being treated and tricked a nurs
decider for the nation. >> it would be the roe v. wade of our generation. >> they have their critics. conservative legal analyst ed whalen. >> there's nothing in the constitution that remotely supports a right to same-sex marriage. >> and even some of those who agree with olson and boyce say that same-sex marriage should be left to the states. >> there are lots of skeptics out there who say that you're going too quickly here and you're asking the supreme court to do a pretty heavy lift. >> every civil rights struggle, there have always been people who have said you're moving too fast, the country is not ready for it. how many people in 1954 said the country is not ready for desegregation. >> everyone says this is the conservative court. why are you doing it now? >> everybody says ted is a conservative guy. there are lots of conservative people. it would be the idea that civil rights and human rights is exclusively a liberal preserve, i think it's flat wrong. >> their clients have faith their lawyers will win. will david and ted be at the wedding? >> they better be. >> they just might
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)